TIHTY Posts Largest Increase Since Radio Release

[Economy 44,047]

2 hours ago, Gagaloo92 said:

Oh please, Gaga is such a big name in the industry, she would get performances regardless of the success of her future singles on the basis of her name and impact alone. It brings in viewers, even if it doesn't translate into "success" by whatever limited definition you mean by that.

 

It's all relative. Cheek to Cheek was a massive success and had no #1 or Top 40 singles, so that argument is baseless and inaccurate.

 

Also, you don't need a huge budget to make a great quality music video. That's just silly. Gaga is here to stay and her name and rapport with others in the industry will make that true regardless of how massive her next album/single will be. It's not even up for debate, so enough with you and all your talk about sales and charts. How typical that you're so obsessed with sales, coming from someone with the name "economy".

This stuff always costs money. The multiple dancers, the team etc. Even if the label doesnt have to pay to have them perform, the production itself costs money

 

and once artists stop being popular they never perform on tv and stuff with a very great frequency no exeptions.

 

U can tell ur self sales dont matter and criticize me for it but i tell u sales do matter

 

as for cheeck to cheeck i dont think any of us expected massive sales but thats a little different. That had the benefit in her career of giving her respect which will help her later. Ppl were getting to critical of her weirdness and "desperation" as the GP called it. Cheeck to cheeck era helped with that

 

But at the end of the day do not forget the music industry is an industry and its controlled by labels seeking money. And tv performances and videos etc are promotions in an attempt to sell enough to pay back and more

 

if she chronically sells less... Do not expect promotion budgets not to get cut with her sales

 

basic economics because yes the music industry is a business

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

59 minutes ago, Economy said:

This stuff always costs money. The multiple dancers, the team etc. Even if the label doesnt have to pay to have them perform, the production itself costs money

 

and once artists stop being popular they never perform on tv and stuff with a very great frequency no exeptions.

 

U can tell ur self sales dont matter and criticize me for it but i tell u sales do matter

 

as for cheeck to cheeck i dont think any of us expected massive sales but thats a little different. That had the benefit in her career of giving her respect which will help her later. Ppl were getting to critical of her weirdness and "desperation" as the GP called it. Cheeck to cheeck era helped with that

 

But at the end of the day do not forget the music industry is an industry and its controlled by labels seeking money. And tv performances and videos etc are promotions in an attempt to sell enough to pay back and more

 

if she chronically sells less... Do not expect promotion budgets not to get cut with her sales

 

basic economics because yes the music industry is a business

Keep justifying your flawed and biased views.

[Economy 44,047]

1 hour ago, Gagaloo92 said:

Keep justifying your flawed and biased views.

Whats biased about it?

 

ur just pressed i had reasons to back up my opinion

 

u call me biased, but i have very real reasons to think this. I swear some of u guys forget that the music business is just that, a business

 

A record label will never spend more money promoting an artist than they make simply out of pride because that artist is a legend or because of whatever name they have

 

all artists at some point in their career stop selling enough to be worth all the promo and thats why you dont see them as much. Theres literally never been an exeption to this. Even artists whos careers span a long time like Madonna only have short bursts at a time of promotion to try and get an era going (because at least legends sell well in their tours)...

 

But they do in fact get less promo and those interviews and tv performances, dont know about u but i love them

 

 

[Mama Ru 994]

13 hours ago, Economy said:

nice it had a buzz for oscars and nice message. But the radio release does more harm than good

Seems like you're just being negative for the sake of being negative but whatever.

[Mr Judas 4,106]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

 

as for cheek to cheek i dont think any of us expected massive sales but thats a little different. That had the benefit in her career of giving her respect which will help her later. Ppl were getting to critical of her weirdness and "desperation" as the GP called it. Cheek to cheek era helped with that

 

Check your spelling before you lash out on some cheek.

[boysboysboys 278]

38 minutes ago, Economy said:

Whats biased about it?

 

ur just pressed i had reasons to back up my opinion

 

u call me biased, but i have very real reasons to think this. I swear some of u guys forget that the music business is just that, a business

 

A record label will never spend more money promoting an artist than they make simply out of pride because that artist is a legend or because of whatever name they have

 

all artists at some point in their career stop selling enough to be worth all the promo and thats why you dont see them as much. Theres literally never been an exeption to this. Even artists whos careers span a long time like Madonna only have short bursts at a time of promotion to try and get an era going (because at least legends sell well in their tours)...

 

But they do in fact get less promo and those interviews and tv performances, dont know about u but i love them

 

 

 

Stop moping, that's it.

[Economy 44,047]

34 minutes ago, boysboysboys said:

 

Stop moping, that's it.

U can disagree with me or my opinion

 

but that user was extremely rude about the way he expressed himself and i do not accept it. 

 

If ppl wanna discuss something or give the opposite point if ciew do so in a civilized mannor. The way he instantly lashed out was unacceptable!!!